Subject: [Gen-art] (late) genart review of draft-arkko-arp-iana-rules-0[123]

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 13:29:47 -0600

(keeping template here in case some future tool goes grepping for it)

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-arkko-arp-iana-rules-03
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date:  01 Dec 2008
IESG Telechat date: 04 Dec 2008

Summary: Ready for publication

Major issues: none
Minor issues: none
Nits/editorial comments:

I didn't see my original assignment to review this draft during last  
call - apologies.

The only comments/questions I have are:

1) Should there be additional guidance in this document for IANA for  
the value they should choose for HW_EXP? ( which side of 256?)

2)  "several" (used in "a batch of several new values") is a fuzzy  
word - I suspect intentional. But is it clear who makes the judgement  
call on whether 2 or 3 is several? Will IANA make that decision, or  
will 2 always cause some expert to get invoked?
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:02:18 +0200

Robert,

Thanks for your review. I will issue an updated draft that clarifies the 
two points you raised.

Jari

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:35:52 +0200

Revision -04 should address your comments. Please check.

Jari

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 09:55:23 -0600

Yes - thanks!
(I looked at -05)
RjS